Let's say that a Greyjoy character is killed by Flame-Kissed. So can I kneel Maester Wendamyr to perform a save action even though it is useless? As we know, Maester charater with chain attachment can trigger some effects by kneeling.

Yes you can. Just because something is "useless" doesn't stop you from being able to do it. Heck, most of the actions I take in a game are useless.

I don't think so. The FAQ says that a card cannot be saved from a terminal effect unless the terminal effect is removed at the same time. "Cannot be saved" is an absolute and basically means "don't even try".

goshdarnstud said:

As Rat points out, the rules specifically prevent you from saving a card that is in a terminal state unless that save effect also and simultaneously removes the card from the terminal state. So you are not allowed to save a character from Flame-Kissed unless the save somehow takes it out of the "kill at 0" at the same time. This can be done by raising the card's STR, invalidating Flame-Kissed's effect, or removing the character from play as part of the save. Maester Wendamyr doesn't do any of that, so you cannot use his save in this situation just to kneel him.

how about new Jaqen whit FK and its str to 0?

can it discards the duplicate(opponent's char card) to save itself and retun to shadow? if it can,that i think its ability like ser davos(core)?

ktom said:

Would Stoic Resolve work? "Knelt characters cannot be killed."

Or are you still unable to initiate the save because by "effect" it doesn't actually prevent his death, only incidentally does paying the cost (kneeling the character) keep him from dying?

db123456 said:

Maester_LUke said:

Asked and answered .

ktom said:

~You can find the search function on these boards?

ktom said:

I have a question about that. Wouldn't Jaqen's ability (more specifically the bit about returning him to hand) execute as a passive in step 4, too late to save him from the terminal effect? Or does any "passive" effect created by a lasting effect resolve immediately when its conditions are met (in this case in step 2, when the duplicate is discarded)?

Saturnine said:

ktom said:

Interesting. I never even considered treating the lasting effect as a constant effect. Treating it as a passive seemed appropriate to me, but I can see how treating it as a constant might work as well. But if both ways are valid, how would resolve the issue in a game? One of the options has to be more right than the other. I think I'll send this in to FFG and see what Nate has to say about it.

But the duplicate doesn't leave play as soon as it's used to save a character, correct? Isn't itself put in a Moribund state until the end of that timing window? If you "save" Jaqen from being killed in the terminal state, and then put the duplicate in the moribund state, then isn't Jaqen instantly killed again by the cause of the terminal state? And thus since Jaqen is now put into the moribund state, he'd leave play simultaneously as his duplicate. Isn't this why the "don't even try" unless the save also removes the terminal state is considered that rule?

Bomb said:

So, for the purposes of "return Jaqen to Shadows," the fact that the dupe becomes moribund is all you need to meet the "duplicate leaves play" play restriction. You don't have to wait for physical removal. That is part of how moribund works.

Bomb said:

Bomb said:

Saturnine said:

So I've got a response from Nate, which I am paraphrasing here: Jaqen's effect specifies a moment of initiation ("if that duplicate leaves play") and is therefore to be treated as a passive effect.

I have so much respect for ktom that I was actually surprised to read his answer, and was left wondering if his ruling in this case was inconsistent with some past rulings, but that's the answer I got.

So after reading this topic What I understand is that If I have Jaqen out with a STR2 and my opponent put a FK on him,

I cannot even try to discard the dupe because it does not save Jaqen from terminal effect, right?

And if only I could, Jaqen would not return into shadoz because it's a passive, right?

I really wonder they release such an inconsistent character, expensive and hard to protect, while there is Arya KL and Cat of the canals out there, protected from practically everything !! Another version FFG pliz, to quickly forget this one.

Kordovan said:

I don't think that "if his STR is 0, kill him" and "if the dupe leaves play, return Jaqen to Shadows" kick in at the same time.

He must first be killed in order to allow the duplicate to be discarded. Only after then the Jaq'en passive of returning to shadows would kick in. But it is now too late to save him from the terminal effect so I couldn't discard the duplicate in the first place

Saturnine said:

That is good to know, although it was kind of figured out if we take the exemple of burn effects that I think all kill as a passive effect, the STR reducer usually being a lasting effect.

Bolzano said:

However, the situation is less clear with Jaqen. The "if that duplicate leaves play" passive could effectively take Jaqen out of the terminal state (by returning him to Shadows), but according to Nate's ruling, that is happening at the same time the "kill if 0" effect reasserts itself. So the First Player would decide the order of those two conflicting effects - ie, returning Jaqen to Shadows and the reassertion of the terminal kill. It becomes hugely important because if the First Player says "return to Shadows first," all is well. But if the First Player says "terminal effect first," it was illegal to trigger the save and discard the dupe in the first place.

Now, don't freak out about this or spend too much time thinking about it. I was merely pointing out the weird situation. Based on the ruling from Nate, you are not allowed to discard the dupe on Jaqen and return him to Shadows to save him from a terminal effect. Since you would need the First Player to say how he would/will resolve the conflict before the conflict can be legally created, you are just not allowed to do it in the first place.

Our results are the same here, Bolanzo. Discarding the dupe will not save Jaqen from burn. I was just noting how complicated the question really is, not trying to say the answer to it was "First Player choice."